Reliability of a Rating Procedure to Monitor Industry Self-Regulation Codes Governing Alcohol Advertising Content

2008 ◽  
Vol 69 (2) ◽  
pp. 235-242 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas F. Babor ◽  
Ziming Xuan ◽  
Dwayne Proctor
2018 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
pp. 96 ◽  
Author(s):  
Belinda Reeve

This paper examines regulation of alcohol advertising regulation in Australia. Specifically, it considers whether the alcohol industry’s code of conduct, the Alcohol Beverages Advertising Code (‘ABAC’) operates as an effective form of industry-based regulation, focusing on provisions that prohibit alcohol advertising in media directed to children and young people, and advertising content or messaging that appeals to minors. The paper sets out a framework for effective self-regulation and applies it to the substantive provisions and regulatory processes established by the ABAC Scheme. The paper finds that the substantive rules found in the ABAC contain a number of significant loopholes, including a failure to adequately restrict the placement of alcohol promotions or to regulate alcohol industry sponsorship. Further, the ABAC Scheme lacks independent administration, systematic monitoring, or meaningful sanctions for responding to non-compliance. Accordingly, regulatory processes lack transparency and accountability, undermining the credibility and efficacy of the Scheme. The paper concludes by outlining a phased or responsive approach to creating a regulatory regime that protects young people more effectively from exposure to alcohol marketing.


Addiction ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 112 ◽  
pp. 86-93 ◽  
Author(s):  
Karine Gallopel-Morvan ◽  
Stanislas Spilka ◽  
Carine Mutatayi ◽  
Alain Rigaud ◽  
Franck Lecas ◽  
...  

2002 ◽  
Vol 2 (3) ◽  
pp. 153-165 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sandra C. Jones ◽  
Robert J. Donovan

Addiction ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 112 (1) ◽  
pp. 63-70 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthis Morgenstern ◽  
Zhongze Li ◽  
Zhigang Li ◽  
James D. Sargent

PLoS ONE ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (12) ◽  
pp. e0261280
Author(s):  
Julia Stafford ◽  
Tanya Chikritzhs ◽  
Hannah Pierce ◽  
Simone Pettigrew

Background Industry self-regulation is the dominant approach to managing alcohol advertising in Australia and many other countries. There is a need to explore the barriers to government adoption of more effective regulatory approaches. This study examined relevance and quality features of evidence cited by industry and non-industry actors in their submissions to Australian alcohol advertising policy consultations. Methods Submissions to two public consultations with a primary focus on alcohol advertising policy were analysed. Submissions (n = 71) were classified into their actor type (industry or non-industry) and according to their expressed support for, or opposition to, increased regulation of alcohol advertising. Details of cited evidence were extracted and coded against a framework adapted from previous research (primary codes: subject matter relevance, type of publication, time since publication, and independence from industry). Evidence was also classified as featuring indicators of higher quality if it was either published in a peer-reviewed journal or academic source, published within 10 years of the consultation, and/or had no apparent industry connection. Results Almost two-thirds of submissions were from industry actors (n = 45 submissions from alcohol, advertising, or sporting industries). With few exceptions, industry actor submissions opposed increased regulation of alcohol advertising and non-industry actor submissions supported increased regulation. Industry actors cited substantially less evidence than non-industry actors, both per submission and in total. Only 27% of evidence cited by industry actors was highly relevant and featured at least two indicators of higher quality compared to 58% of evidence cited by non-industry actors. Conclusions Evaluation of the value of the evidentiary contribution of industry actors to consultations on alcohol advertising policy appears to be limited. Modifications to consultation processes, such as exclusion of industry actors, quality requirements for submitted evidence, minimum standards for referencing evidence, and requirements to declare potential conflicts, may improve the public health outcomes of policy consultations.


BMJ ◽  
2010 ◽  
Vol 340 (jan20 1) ◽  
pp. b5650-b5650 ◽  
Author(s):  
G. Hastings ◽  
O. Brooks ◽  
M. Stead ◽  
K. Angus ◽  
T. Anker ◽  
...  

1982 ◽  
Vol 1 (3) ◽  
pp. 223-236 ◽  
Author(s):  
Donald E. Strickland

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document